23XI Racing, which is owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin, and Front Row Motorsports filed a small Monday night urging U. S. District Judge Kenneth D. Bell to refuse NASCAR’s activity for a stay of a preliminary injunction. The order will prevent NASCAR from denying the two groups the same words that were offered to contract teams and ensure they are not compelled to transfer legal claims against NASCAR. It will be stayed by Bell or vacated on charm to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
When he half granted NASCAR’s activity for an expedited review of the demanded keep last Friday, Bell instructed the defendants, who are led by prosecutor Jeffrey Kessler, to record a simple no later than 10 a. m. Monday. Bell stated he will rule on the motion for a stay at some point on Monday.

The plaintiffs ‘ brief, which was signed by Kessler, escalates a already contentious case in which 23XI Racing and Front Row are accused of abusing the legal process to renegotiate a failed business deal while NASCAR is accused of abusing monopsony power over racing teams.
NASCAR and co-defendant CEO Jim France are described in the brief as using litigation theatrics to cover up legal flaws.
” When a litigant does not have either the law or the facts on its side, it will pound the table”, the brief charges, adding” Defendants ‘ pounding has become tired, familiar, and shrill”. The brief contends NASCAR is” simply rearguing—but louder—the same points that this Court has already heard and properly rejected”.
In response to 23XI Racing and Front Row’s plans to purchase two Stewart-Haas Racing ( SHR ) charters, the brief criticizes NASCAR’s claim that such a situation was not given a fair chance to address charter transfer issues. The two teams could compete under the terms of the charters. As the brief tells it, NASCAR previously and unsuccessfully made that same argument, except now is using an “elevated tone” as if that is a differentiator.
The plaintiffs ‘ lawsuit was filed a few months ago, but neither 23XI Racing nor Front Row “had any reason to believe” that NASCAR would stop the transfers unless they had already reneged on their legal rights. The lawsuit claims that NASCAR president Steve Phelps “informed Front Row that its SHR transfer was approved” and that the only thing that stood between formal approval and submission of some paperwork was, as the brief describes. But in December, NASCAR told Front Row that it would not approve the transfer. The brief contends,” the only intervening event was Front Row filing this lawsuit”.

The brief insists that the NASCAR questions about” 23XI’s compliance with the Team Owner and Control Person requirements of the Charter” are pretextual. There can be no “legitimate questions” of whether 23XI owners could be classified as” Prohibited Persons”, the brief charges, since Jordan and Hamlin have had NASCAR-approved charter agreements” for years”.
Phelps ‘ praise of Jordan and Hamlin is also cited in the brief as being incongruent with the idea that they might not be appropriate to own a team. According to Phelps,” I love that Michael Jordan plays in our sport.” I personally like Michael and consider him to be beneficial to the sport. Phelps ‘ praise of Hamlin is also stressed. ” Denny Hamlin’s … doing a tremendous job … I’d like to have 36 Denny Hamlins”. According to the brief,” the only reason” that NASCAR could label Jordan and Hamlin as “prohibited persons” is “because they have asserted their antitrust rights and filed this lawsuit.” Of course, NASCAR could argue that Jordan and Hamlin’s opinion has changed as a result of lawsuit-related arguments and assertions that NASCAR contends are untrue.
If Bell grants the stay, the injunction would be sidelined until the Fourth Circuit hears NASCAR’s appeal. That could take weeks or months.
If Bell rejects the stay, 23XI Racing and Front Row will likely have “won” in the near-term because they could compete with charter rights and fight back without reversing their legal claims. They could also go over the SHR deal.
But in that scenario, the Fourth Circuit could still reverse Bell and vacate the injunction. NASCAR could still ultimately win the case, which is scheduled to go to trial in December. Even if the Fourth Circuit affirms Bell, Bell has only ruled on an injunction, not on the merits of the plaintiffs ‘ wider claim that NASCAR has violated antitrust law. Anytime, the parties could reach a deal.